ATTENDANCE: Judith Rivas, Chairperson; J. Olmstead-Sawyer, Barbara

STAFF: Peter Callahan, Health Department Director

The Chairperson opened the meeting at 7:45 p.m.

MINUTES

The Chairperson stated that the minutes of the last meeting were not available for review.

** MR. MANN MOVED TO TABLE THE MINUTES TO THE NEXT

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

STATUS REPORT

Mr. Callahan began the meeting by asking that the complaints be addressed. Mr. Sumberg, Assistant Corporation Counsel, stated that he just heard about the trees being cut down around the Hatch & Bailey site. The problem was noted that there seemed to be no permits and there was a lot of dust rising. A cease and desist was issued, appealed by Hatch & Bailey, forwarded to the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Board refused to hear it. The owner of the property was not cited and therefore, no hearing was held. Mr. Sumberg stated that the property is owned by the railroad. The residents were present and the information from the meeting was published. However, the residents did not appeal within 15 days and the cease and desist order was lifted.

Mr. Sumberg spoke with the attorney for Hatch & Bailey and reviewed the documents for its operation. He saw an affidavit by Mr. Haine that stated the property was purchased back in 1927. Mr. Sumberg noted that there was a lease between the former owner dating back to 1926 and is current now with Hatch & Bailey. Zoning was enacted in 1927 in Norwalk and uses established prior to that date can continue in the same form as a non-conforming activity. As long as Hatch & Bailey uses the property in the same manner as in 1926 or 1927, the City cannot interfere with the use, it is a right. Another point is that non-conforming use cannot be expanded. If the material is unloaded by truck, as the railroad is no longer used, this is an allowed use. If the process is intensified, enlarged or expanded, that is not allowed. If the load is other than what the original use has been, it is not allowed. Zoning finds itself without facts to base citing the company again.

Mr. Sumberg stated that the neighbors could appeal a finding by the Zoning inspector and if one does not, it becomes binding. Unless new information is presented to have another investigation, no citation can be given to the owner, the railroad, and Hatch & Bailey. It would not be a new trial, but an appeal. He also stated that it is technical in nature and the residents should have an attorney to represent them. The Zoning Board of Appeals could agree with the finding and the residents can then appeal so that the issue can be sorted out. He stated that the people will need help, it is better to have an attorney.

Mr. Krummel said the major source of the annoyance is the black compound brought in from New York by truck used in making the concrete blocks, which was not in use in 1926 or 1927. He questioned whether the use of new material causing more annoyance would be considered a non-conforming use.

Mr. Sumberg responded that would be expansion. Mr. Sumberg gave an example of a contractor in Wilton who put in a piece of equipment to measure material that was not a part of his original process. The Zoning Board of Appeals of that town agreed that it was an expansion, not an existing use.

Mr. Wein clarified that the outcome was that the neighbors did not appeal. Mr. Sumberg confirmed that was the case. The information was published and the neighbors did not appeal within the 15-day period.

Ms. Hudgins inquired whether the words "expanded or intensified" describe change at a non-conforming site. Mr. Sumberg stated that was so. If the material is deemed hazardous, the black compound, it becomes a Health issue, not a Zoning issue.

Mr. Krummel noted that the trucks and loaders have tires that kick up a lot of dust. Mr. Sumberg stated the railroad cars would bring in much more material. He also said that he gives legal advice and could not speak to the trucks versus the railroad.

Mr. Wein asked if the item was could be appealed. Mr. Sumberg said not the original citing. A new citing to t he owner and Hatch & Bailey would be required.

Ms. Hudgins found it difficult to understand that a pre-existing operation before Zoning was not appealed in the past. Mr. Sumberg stated if Hatch & Bailey abandoned the operation at some point, they could lose their non-conforming status and must then conform to the current Zoning regulations. It does not appear that Hatch & Bailey has done so.

Mr. Krummel pointed out that a railroad was involved and asked if Mr. Sumberg knew the name. Mr. Sumberg stated that he did not know the name as the original railroad is in trusteeship.

Mr. Williams inquired whether the Health department can overrule a decision made by Zoning. Mr. Sumberg and Mr. Callahan stated that the Health Department deals with health issues. Mr. Callahan stated that his department enforces health, Zoning enforces zoning laws, one cannot overrule the other’s decisions. Secondly, Mr. Williams stated that when he moved into his home there were trees, now there are sand piles. He asked whether that was expansion. Mr. Sumberg stated that if the area is enlarged, that is expansion.

Ms. Vega stated that South Main Street seems to have had the same expansion. There were trees, but now there are none where the trucks pass through and deposit mounds of earth. She stated that it has been years of activity and the residents stated that they have no recourse. She also commented that the railroad was not used for years as she remembers, as a child who grew up in South Norwalk, how the kids crossed the tracks.

Ms. Frank stated that when Hatch & Bailey came in to the Haine property they did so without concern for the neighbors. They moved heavy equipment and damaged the street and sidewalk. From her porch she can see straight up Knapp Street from South Main. She asked what was being done there and the comment from a worker was that they don’t own the railroad tracks they just cross over them through the opening. She said the large piles of sand/dirt come into the homes, covers the cars and covers people. She has lived there for over 26 years. She said all the sand in the street and on the houses is destroying the area.

Mr. Sumberg stated that the Hatch & Bailey Company leases the space from the railroad and has the right to be on the tracks. He said if the area has been expanded, it is up to the residents to give a report/complaint regarding the condition of South Main Street. He stated that the City will listen but they have to be informed with the right documentation to take action.

Mr. Paulk stated that he attended that ZBA meeting noted earlier in the discussion and the residents were asked to leave because of the late hour and the ZBA was not doing anything about the citation.

Mr. Wein stated that it seems that the group may have been fooled into leaving. Mr. Sumberg responded if that was the case, the residents need to have counsel to prove that they were duped and that the Hatch & Bailey property has been expanded. He also stated that the residents could have called the Zoning Inspector, Jim Bradley, the next day to find out what the decision was. A decision not to hear is a decision and the citation was dropped. Finding out this information earlier than the printed notice in the paper would have afforded the residents to have more than 15 days to respond.

Mr. Paulk stated that he has lived in the south end since 1981 when it was Haine. He stated there was little noise, little dust. He stated that they have expanded with rocks in the area and caused rats to run into their neighbors’ yards. Hatch & Bailey has eliminated the rats by covering over the holes they originally created, but there is a lot of dust. He stated that he has videos of the area and no one will view them from the Health department.

Mr. Dumas stated that the City cut away some brush, but the opening currently is from water run off that washed out the area and flattened the sidewalk.

Ms. Lauricella has been advising the neighbors and stated that the meeting needs to move forward so the answers could be found regarding the health issues. She stated that the neighbors were asked for information but no follow up of detail was requested from the neighbors. She stated that the staff needs training on intake of information. Her review of the file and after speaking with the neighbors found they were not asked enough questions to give the needed information for Zoning to go back out and review the situation. She said she hoped that the new administration will act on this more readily than the old administration. She asked whether the Zoning personnel have been asked to go back to do their homework on the zoning issues.

Mr. Sumberg stated he did not know what the staff did or did not do. The people do have the right to give the zoning officer the information that he needs to do what is necessary. Mr. Sumberg. stated that written documentation would be the best way to make the situation clear and get the results they are looking to receive.

Mr. Wein asked if the individuals went to zoning whether they would get help in the office to fill out a complaint form.

Ms. Vega said that the neighbors would not know that they needed to come into City Hall unless someone tells them so. She said the neighbors are common ordinary people and would not know to get legal counsel.

Mr. Dumas said that he went to Hatch & Bailey with Mr. Callahan and spoke with Mr. DeLong to resolve the problem. Mr DeLong was asked to help lower the dust and reduce the noise. Hatch & Bailey agreed to put up large block, "mafia blocks" to keep the sand and dust from draining into the street. They are not high enough to stop the dust. There was also a request to put up dust monitors, but that did not happen.

Ms. Hall stated that she cannot open her windows or doors because of dust within one-half hour. She also asked what type of chemicals are being used that filter into the homes.

Mr. Callahan referenced the plan at this point to help with the dust problem and water run off. Hatch & Bailey has agreed to put up a retaining wall to prevent the run off onto South Main Street. There is 400 feet of frontage on South Main. Hatch & Bailey will take care of 200 feet and the City will handle the remaining 200 feet. There will be a mixture of trees planted. Some of the trees will be in front of and behind the wall because of limited earth. Hatch & Bailey will wet down the piles and if that does not work, they will take further action. Connecticut DEP has informed the City that they should be involved in this matter. Only DEP can enforce the state statutes on air quality. Mr. Callahan has a problem with the DEP taking control because they have only 12 inspectors and they took two months to come down. The DEP office is arranging to work with the local health department concurrently. The local health inspectors are monitoring the site daily. If an enforcement action takes place by DEP, it is a very lengthy process. They have a 40 to 90 day window, which is very slow. The best route would be co-operative compliance.

Mr. Wein said that trees may not live if they are planted inside the wall with all the sand piles.

Mr. Dumas inquired how high the wall would be. Mr. Callahan stated that the wall would be one mafia block high, three feet.

Ms. Olmstead-Sawyer stated that the trees should be planted in front of the wall, not behind it.

Mr. Paulk said that with the former trees there was still dust. Mr. Callahan stated that the new trees will be pines which will not lose the leaves. The residents stated that the wall needs to be higher and the piles need to covered over.

Mr. Krummel commented that he went out on the site and the black compound is very light and blows easily in the wind. He stated that the three-foot high wall is too low. He noted that an enclosed process is used for making the cinder blocks. He felt that wetting down the piles should be done immediately.

Ms. Lauricella suggested that the City request a copy of the permit for the cinder block process from Air Compliance in Hartford. The black material has not been identified to determine if it is a health hazard. She stated that limestone could be a health hazard. She did not see that the plan is thoroughly addressing the health hazard with the wetting down of the pile or the wall. No one knows what the potential hazards are to the residents.

She said that upon determination, Hatch & Bailey could move the piles so that the dust piles are not in the mainstream wind flow. She asked that the City goes back to the drawing board and determines whether is a nuisance or a hazard.

Ms. Vega commented that the 400 feet of trees does not help with the low wall. Number 127 South main has a two-story pile of dirt that blows right out across the houses. The wall and the height of the piles should be equal. The dirt should not exceed the height of the wall.

Mr. Williams asked whether the piles could be enclosed with an opening to the inside of Hatch & Bailey property. The Chairman stated that the piles are covered in compliance with a regulation. Building sheds for the piles is another matter.

Ms. Lauricella commented that the Director of Health has the ability to take action to determine the nuisance and/or hazard. She said the Health Department can assist another local department to help resolve issues.

Mr. Callahan inquired of Ms. Lauricella whether her reference to nuisance was that of the State Statute. She replied that was the one. Mr. Callahan said that nuisance does not include this dust problem. Mr. Callahan stated that he has asked the State Health Dept. to assist and they are giving input to the local problem.

Mr. Mann stated that getting back to Hatch & Bailey would be the best way to discuss a taller wall and enclosures for the piles of sand since it has been two years since there has been a one-on-one with Hatch & Bailey.

Mr. Dumas commented that the blocks would have to be depressed into the soil to keep the runoff from flooding the street. He suggested a wall like that on I-95 to reduce noise from the trucks and the front loaders that bring in materials.

Ms. Hudgins thought that the wall may not keep the dust level down.

Mr. Krummel reminded the Committee that at a previous meeting the residents presented a petition a year ago. He also reviewed the minutes and the two seemed to be repetitious. He asked now what will be done and when will the Committee do something. He said it should be done within a reasonable amount of time.

The Chairman stated she will initiate the issue with the Zoning department. Mr. Mann stated that progress has been made and the plan is one piece of this effort. He stated that the Committee is on its way to getting something done. The next step might be to talk with Hatch & Bailey to see what they would do.

Mr. Wein asked that the neighbors express their thoughts on what has been brought to the table and then proceed.

Mr. Krummel inquired whether a Hatch & Bailey representative was invited. Mr. Sumberg stated that the legal counsel for them was aware. The Chairman said she was disappointed that Hatch & Bailey did not have a representative at the meeting.

Mr. Wein said that Hatch & Bailey needs to be a good neighbor and work with the neighborhood and the City.

The general agreement was to make the wall higher, plant the trees and put up a wall for the water run off. Ms. Hudgins stated that there are two walls, one for the water runoff and one for noise.

Chief Rilling stated that there is a lot of noise is inherent to that area that has nothing to do with Hatch & Bailey. A wall for Hatch & Bailey might have the effect of echoing the traffic noise more so. There needs to be a study to determine what might be the best way to handle the wall.

Chief Rilling reported that between May and June there were 21 different readings from various directions. When researching the allowed level regarding noise, the area has to be reviewed and what goes on there. He said that the decibel level for the issuing and receiving area must be noted. Ambient noise has to be addressed as well. The results of the test produced readings that were not in violation for the area. There was traffic along with Hatch & Bailey noise and ambient noise. The noise being heard at the residences is higher than the level allowed for the area. However, the noise was above maximum level with Hatch & Bailey closed.

Ms. Lauricella suggested taking readings at 7 a.m. and at 214 that is higher. Chief Rilling felt that it may be that there will be no higher noise from Hatch & Bailey to the receiving properties. Noise meter reading is a two-part process, a meter being recently calibrated and the trained reader determining where the noise is coming from., The allowed decibel level is 61 in the area. On June 4 with Hatch & Bailey being closed the maximum level read was 91.8. That reading was comparable to an active jet engine.

Mr. Dumas said the findings were true. He stated that day an excavator was working at the old Community College building. A passing car radio brought the noise up to 81 decibels. The Hatch & Bailey property was closed.

Mr. Paulk said the readings are taken at the wrong times. A complaint was called to headquarters for 7 a.m. and answered but the officer arrived after the truck making the noise had left the site.

Chief Rilling stated that an officer might not be available at the time of the call. They must be certified. The call may not have a priority over a heart attack victim or an accident.

Mr. Paulk said that the noise begins at 6 a.m./7 a.m. in the morning. Chief Rilling stated that he will station someone at that hour. He said based on what they might find, no citation may be issued or only to the truck driver, not Hatch & Bailey.

The chairman asked Mr. Callahan to prepare the room for a video presentation at the next meeting to view Mr. Paulk’s video and the hear the noise levels he mentioned.

Mr. Dumas stated that the noise from the large trucks is excessive in the early morning around 7 a.m. for approximately one hour dumping a payload.

Chief Rilling stated that if the call comes through, he may not be able to send an officer who is qualified and available. The truck driver will be given a summons, not Hatch & Bailey. He said ground rules will have to be set for start times at Hatch & Bailey to assist the neighbors. He further stated that there are companies in town who have been cited for violations. Hatch & Bailey will be fined as well once it can be proven they are in violation. Chief Rilling advised that the caller should give the information needed, however, if the call is not responded to, he should call back and ask to speak with a supervisor. He also stated that at 7 a.m. there is a staffing change and an officer for noise control may not be available.

Mr. Paulk stated that three homes 212, 214, 216 get the most noise more so than other residents do. Chief Rilling stated that the noise heard may not be in violation along with the other noise in the area.

Mr. Paulk asked whether he could monitor the noise with the same type meter. The Chief responded that the finding of that unit would not be credible in court.

Mr. Krummel asked that Mr. Paulk take the readings to compare with the findings of the Police Department. He further stated that the department has done an excellent job. He felt that the wall for the dust containment will create an echo and create a greater nuisance. He felt the most productive resolution is to enclose the piles to reduce the dust and some means of reducing the noise of the trucks.

Chief Rilling stated that the decibels were all above the allowable rate. He said that Mr. Paulk will possibly get the same readings and will have to determine if the reading is coming from Hatch & Bailey.

Ms. Reid stated the noise is so loud that she is constantly jumpy from the tailgate of the trucks banging.

Chief Rilling stated that unless a cease and desist is issued to Hatch & Bailey and the railroad owner/trustee, only the truck driver will be issued a fine of $99.

Mr. Williams asked why the noise is over the decibels allowed. Chief Rilling stated it includes ambient noise. Mr. Williams wanted the information noted so that no more industrial businesses will be added to South Norwalk by Zoning.

Mr. Wein agreed with Mr. Krummel about the wall. It may put the people into an echo chamber. Mr. Wein asked whether the noise caused by traffic and buses could be looked into.

Ms. Paulk inquired whether any type of wall would create an echo. Chief Rilling responded that he was not an expert in that area, but he said they should not construct a wall that will make the situation worse. Se further commented that when Hatch & Bailey is open the noise is excessive. When they are closed there is ambient noise but the noise is unbearable when Hatch & Bailey is open. She also asked whether they are to be open on Saturday. There is no relief from the noise. The Chief stated that was new information to him and he would check on it. She asked whether they would notify Hatch & Bailey that they would check the noise level. Chief Rilling stated they are not warned ahead of time.

Ms. Lauricella asked how many officers are certified. Chief Rilling stated between 12 and 15, but he would check for the exact number. She asked how one files a nuisance disturbance. Chief Rilling gave an example of a party with loud music. Her second question was could there be any consideration of re-routing traffic off South Main to come around to Martin Luther King Drive. Chief Rilling stated that the issue would have to be taken up at the Traffic Commission. He said that he did not think that Norwalk Police did not have the authority. Her third question was whether the Police department can work with the Health Department to assist in reducing the noise. Chief Rilling stated that would be subjective and it would fall to Ordinance who created the ruling on noise. If it were a violation and then the Police would be involved.

Mr. Dumas stated that for the past six years he has been part of the cleanup group for South Main Street. He wonders how come it takes so long to resolve issues in South Norwalk. He stated if it were another affluent area, something would have been done already. Sidewalks are cracking, telephone poles are leaning over. The residents are told they must repair the sidewalks. Yet, nothing gets done. He said he helps with all the cleanups. He said this body is designed to help the people. The issue today is to try and stop the dust and noise to allow people to live normally like others in this City. He does not want Hatch & Bailey to leave the City, but they come with numerous lawyers at a meeting which speaks to their guilt in being uncooperative. He does not want people who live outside the community to come into the City and dump on the residents in South Norwalk.

Ms. Paulk requested that in speaking with Hatch & Bailey whether wood or concrete would best for the noise. Mr. Dumas said the walls on I-95 are wood to reduce noise.

Mr. Mann stated that he does not know why it takes so long. He understands the concern. He stated that those on the Committee want to get it resolved. Things don’t happen as quickly as one would wish. He stated that he has attended meetings and he too became frustrated. Progress has been made and now the next conversation will bring additional results. Hatch & Bailey is willing to work on the project, City agencies are willing to assist and this is positive for the residents. It is not that the Committee does not desire to help, but due process takes time and the Committee wishes the residents to know that the project is moving forward.

The Chairman stated that a time line will be developed and the zoning issues can be addressed first of all. She asked for a date for the next meeting. The next regular meeting is July 16, 2002. Mr. Mann noted it might depend on when the Committee members meet with Hatch & Bailey and a special meeting could be called. The Chairman will arrange a meeting with Hatch & Bailey and then announce the next meeting. Mr Wein stated the time line will have to be filled in as things progress.

Mr. Krummel inquired what the next steps might be. The Chairman suggested meeting with Hatch & Bailey and then making an interim meeting date. If not, the regularly scheduled meeting will be when the information is discussed again.

Ms. Hudgins suggested obtaining information for a retaining wall and a noise barrier prior to the meeting with Hatch & Bailey.

Ms. Lauricella suggested the following:

• More readings be taken
• Affidavits submitted to P&Z from the residents to allow P&Z to go back to the drawing board to see if there has been an expansion
• Health Department research the health hazards through DEP and get a copy of their permit file from Air Control in Hartford

The storm drains are filled by sand from this company and DPW spends time and money clearing the drains.

The Chairman asked Ms. Lauricella to give her a copy of her suggestions. Mr. Callahan said he would like the suggestions in writing as well.

Ms. Lauricella refused to make a listing of her suggestions at the request of the Chairman and Mr. Callahan. She vehemently stated that the staff, Mr. Callahan, could do the research himself and she would not do it. She alleged that Mr. Callahan rolled his eyes, which he denied doing. She also stated that there was a secretary taking notes. She said Mr. Callahan was taking notes and it was time for the professionals to do their job in the City positions they hold and not have citizens like her doing it for them. She felt the citizens are doing the job of the professionals of the City and she was not being paid to do so. She further commented that she did not have the time to do it in 24 hours to give to the Chairman.

The Chairman apologized and stated it was a long list of items and asked that she might be willing to give them to her. Ms. Lauricella stated again that she was not being paid and that she could not turn this information around in 24 hours. She did say in the end she would give the information the to Chairman reluctantly

Mr. Krummel stated that it was unprofessional that Hatch & Bailey did not show.

The Chairman asked that each person wait to be called upon to speak. He said that the Chairman had allowed others to speak out of turn prior to his speaking. Mr. Krummel said very forcefully that the Chairman acknowledged others and he had something to say as well. He also said that the Chairman had not conducted the meeting very well and had not kept order throughout the meeting.

The Chairman was visibly shaken by Mr. Krummel’s comments and apologized to all.

Ms. Olmstead-Sawyer spoke up and stated that the hour was late and many were tired and it would be best to go forward with what had been decided at this meeting and suggested that the Chairman close the meeting at this point.

Mr. Mann agreed with Ms. Olmstead-Sawyer and made a motion to close the meeting.

** MR. MANN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.

** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Alvina L. Richardson Decker

Telesco Secretarial Services

Back to Previous Page	Back to Home Page